that attaching these plates to the presidential vehicles demonstrates the president's commitment to the principle for representation for the people of the district of columbia and his willingness to fight for voting rights home rule and budget autonomy for the district wait goes obama put a d.c. license plate on his cars idolized him as some sort of civil rights leader here's a better question and so is standing with d.c. residents mr president why don't you just give us the representation we deserve oh too busy you got another drone strike to plant instead gotcha said my piece so. it's remarkably rare to hear a politician tell it like it is and that's why i'm excited to highlight my hero today this is james abourezk he's a former u.s. representative and senator from south dakota back when he was elected in the

seventy's he made history as the first arab american ever to serve in the senate but his real legacy is a nonprofit he founded in the one nine hundred eighty called the american arab anti-discrimination committee the largest arab american grassroots organization in the u.s. that defends arab rights and since that time he's been by and large under the radar that is until now just recently he was invited to speak at an international forum held at the university of south dakota where he had this to say about u.s. foreign policy he said i think it's in the interest of the u.s. to get the hell out of the middle east. but wasn't i like it and man i could not agree with you more he went on to say this isn't my theory is the reason we're helping to try to overthrow the syrian regime is that we want to break the alliance between iran and syria the reason we want to break the alliance even though iran is no threat to us is because israel wants the regime to be overthrown . make sense i mean after all week syria means a week iran strong syria means

a strong iran you can't really look at these countries as isolated when it comes to foreign policy we all know that and even goes on to say how the israel lobby has bribed a lot of policy makers in washington wow it really is refreshing to hear someone with firsthand knowledge say out loud that the allegiance this country has to israel is due writing and debilitating progress in the u.s. and peace in the middle east so for telling it like it is for giving us that unvarnished truth that's so hard to find these days you senator james. are my hero today so if he's the hero who's the villain one of the great displeasure of calling out a miss rachel abrams a new on the board of the emergency committee for israel the reason i'm calling her out is her very hard line she's chosen to take against president obama's nomination for secretary of defense chuck hagel the man who could be called out for

a million different things but instead has been demonized first amy made over six years ago well the organization just posted this full page ad in new york times yesterday calling into question hazels loyalty and labeling him as anti israel even going as far as saying it including a quote from alan dershowitz that suggests hagel quote speaks the language of the bigots of to iran. wow strong language and look i'm not calling out abrams for having an opinion that she's more than entitled to but i am calling her out for blatant hypocrisy because the only reason chuck hagel is being smeared is anti israel is because he said this in two thousand and six he said the political reality is that the jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here i mean you noted state senator i'm not an israeli senator. true that so the reason the situation here reeks of irony is because rachel abrams is one of the most hateful human beings i've come across lately when she's not

smearing the names of those critical of israel she's devoting her time and energy to the hatred of palestinians share she said on her blog that we should round up quote death of worshiping innocent butchering child sacrificing savages who dipped their hands in blood and use women those who aren't strapping bombs to their own devil's spawn and send them out to meet their seventy two virgins. whoa whoa hold on no you should despicable he goes on to say palestinians are quote hiding behind their burkas and rattles like the unmanned animals they are throw them not into your prisons where they can bide until they're treated by thousands by the thousands for another child of israel but into the sea to float their food for sharks. unmanned animals food for sharks and these are human beings we're talking about and frankly i'm speechless. look i think it's pretty

obvious why rachel i hate rooms is my villain and i think i'll just leave it at that. looking for a never seen anything like that. in just a few days israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu will seek a third term to leave the country for another four years and he's running on a platform to make israel the most powerful nation it can be in order to deal with threats such as iran's nuclear program so is next yahoo really pegged to win and what will the outcome of this election signify for palestinians and the region at large to talk about all that and more i'm joined by yousif nayar executive director of the jerusalem fun and educational program the palestine center thanks so much for coming on thanks for having me so set the stage for us in terms of the israeli elections what are the main parties and who is the most viable opposition

to netanyahu right now well it's interesting because there isn't really serious opposition to netanyahu i think one thing that is often misunderstood is that there is a left in a right in israel even the parties that are not in the government currently the parties that make up what many referred to as the israeli right there their backgrounds their ideological backgrounds mostly come from the traditional israeli right so and i'm referring here to kadima and and leaders like show and livni. there's really no left left in israel what you have now is extreme right and right and they're very clearly wrong on the issues. you have most disturbingly in this

upcoming election a phenomenon of extremely right wing annexationists settlers who are going to take a significant number of seats in the israeli knesset become a major player in the formation of a new government coalition and not only deny the existence of a palestinian state. the right of palestinians to self-determination in the west bank and gaza but also openly call for the enix ation of palestinian territory in the west bank a step that even the current israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu has not called for and for me yeah and you mentioned. you know. i was surprised to see that they were also a vocal supporter of the settlements i mean here we're talking about the second largest party i mean it just seems like like you said there's really no opposition to that line when it comes to settlement no absolutely not and you know it's gotten so far right so colonialist in israeli politics today that people look at kadima

some sort of refreshing change from the norm the reality is that even in two thousand and eight at the peak of the sort of you know annapolis process the kadima government led at the time by a person who is now considered a moderate in comparison to benjamin netanyahu who had all murder he was busy building settlements deep inside the west bank so we should be under no illusions that the kadima movement or the movement which is which is now the party that is led by its if you live me is going to be radically different than netanyahu when it comes to support for settlements and mines of this country when we have someone very extreme on the right like romney and it makes obama look almost liberal by comparison i mean that's how much the dialogue or when you have this kind of false dichotomy really shifts the dialogue it makes people think that that's happening so i mean you just said you know if netanyahu does win of course we can expect more of

the same i want to get your opinion on iran i mean he's been running pretty much on this hard line against iran he's pioneered his whole campaign against being the strong leader do you think that he's using this as a way to weigh in and kind of distracting israelis from their own domestic problems well it's interesting because the iranian issue was a major part of the. international discussion. prior to the american election immediately after the american election it sort of disappeared from from the discussion and from the discourse i expect that to return after the israeli election i expect there to be further discussion about iran precisely because it is a very useful way to distract not only from domestic issues that are important to israelis and there are a variety of issues that are important to israelis just like anyone else but particularly to distract from international pressure on israel to do anything about its ongoing occupation of palestinian territory just like the war on terror

distracts us from what's happening here the kind of the fear mongering the threat of terrorism i wanted to show you this article from the monitor that says palestinians of course hamas fatah must unite if they expect to have any leverage really do you agree with this assessment well i think that you know there are certainly legitimacy questions when it comes to the palestinian leadership and there are definitely needs for reform and realignment and better representation across the board this this is larger than a mass in fact to what really goes to a question of representation of all palestinian stakeholders that's going to be important when it comes to ever achieving a lasting and just agreement absolutely we cannot though let that be a distraction now from what has to happen which is ending israeli colonization of palestinian territory because regardless to whether or not the palestinian house is united israel doesn't need to be changing the realities on the ground making

a viable palestinian state less possible by the day we need to do though is think about what sort of policies are in place that are either creating sent incentives for palestinian unity or palestinian division and if we're serious about you know fomenting any sort of real peace process we need to look at paul. so yes which can bring palestinians together and not force them apart absolutely and talking about israel kind of changing the reality on the ground i can't help but bring up this you know this infamous snafu from the new york times i want to show you i'm sure you've seen it where they first published this article about the encroachment of settlements and they and they first labeled it palestinians set up camp in israeli occupied west bank territory and then later changed palestinians set up tents where israel plans homes i mean how is that what is going on here where i don't know if it's the israeli lobby or what that's really shaping the

perception of how we view this conflict both as a truly unfortunate incident at the new york times where as you said they had a headline which noncontroversial terms describing situations of reality where the occupied territory the israelis occupy and in fact in the lead to that article they mention israeli occupied territory and so you know i think the problem was when they went and changed it because then it made it seem as if there was something wrong with describing it in that way in that purely factual way and so yes i think it calls into question you know the way the media really represents what is going on on the ground and the big problem with that of course is our understanding of what happens between israelis and palestinians runs through this filter of the mainstream media and in turn as americans that shapes our opinions and shapes the opinions of policymakers and our representatives who are making policies that frankly have not been helpful for the situation so i think it's really

disappointing to see things like that and if the media could be more candid about the situation and didn't run away from describing it in terminology that really shows what's going on on the ground then we'd all be better off of course yeah absolutely and of course it does and hit the pressure that we put on our elected representatives to really take a stand against this. legal activity and of course a violation of international crimes or international law rather thank you so much for coming on kind of shedding some light on the issue he says executive director of the tourism fund fisher here to do. nothing like what you see you go to our you tube channel you to dot com slash breaking offensive scared to us take us on who lose lol good come to the top and flush breaking down the stats and check out our facebook page at facebook dot com not bad enough that if you want about what i'm doing what i'm not on are follow me on twitter at the mine with the break my preaching the stay tuned for the latest from the bradley manning trial next.

wealthy british style it's time to write in the times. market why not come to. find out what's really happening to the global economy with mike stronger for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into kinds a report on our.

i've. been. ill.

immediately. live live. live. in. em. as you probably noticed i like to make regular updates in the case of private first class bradley manning they gave us on a disappointing note that the army judge ruled that manning will only get a mere hundred twelve a reduction to his overall sentence if convicted in the charge of aiding the enemy through the disclosure of government documents there wiki leaks could still land manning a life sentence in military prison was trials finally scheduled for june third of this year by which point you have been imprisoned pretrial without charges for a total of one thousand one hundred and one days so help me talk about the latest on the manning try joined now by journalist and legal researcher

a look so brian has been live tweeting on the pretrial hearings for me thank you so much for coming on taking time out of the day to come thanks for asking so let's talk about the hearings i know last time you were here and it was right after kind of the new york times and. to the network for saying you're not covering this enough what has the media presence increased that will set the stage for a rolling stone is there or has been if not at this particular motion hearing the new york times is there scott shane was there and in fact we were reading him earlier today about the fact that you know we were part of the sort of people who are saying the new york times was in there the washington post is there the a.p. has been there throughout. so i think that the media is starting to take interest especially because of the discussion at the last session regarding aiding the enemy and the press is going to talk about that. there was basically a discussion around witnesses about whether or not

they would have charged the government would have charged the case had the media organization been the new york times and the prosecution said yes and so i think that there is suddenly an upsurge and also the trial is sort of around the corner although you said june third you know early on in these motion hearings the government said they wanted to push it to august so it could happen in august to i mean you know it just depends. i mean obviously the right to speedy trial gone out the window far long ago why is there so little explanation for why they're dragging this out so long that it can even go to august at this point because they can i mean it executive it's arbitrary it's indiscriminate of course when they come to court you know they say well we you know said these e-mails and that we had activity fundamentally what the defense is saying is that they did docket the accused to trial in one hundred twenty days and it was with prejudice and that they use this sort of complexity of the case as an excuse for for example not actually

requesting these classification reviews that held up the original article thirty two which is like a grand jury for the military accused. they waited about a year to actually even request. so that's what was argued today. and you also were saying on twitter the motive versus intent i wanted you to kind of explain to our audience for people who aren't following the case as thoroughly break that down sure early on in the motion hearings the defense had actually filed a motion to dismiss. i'm sorry the government actually filed a motion to preclude harm from the merits part of the trial that means the charges are being proven in that part of the trial not the sentencing etc they wanted to get rid of that and then recently they filed another motion saying they wanted to get rid of motive so they just want to sort of craft an official secrets act say that it doesn't matter whether or not he intended to harm or wanted to harm if he broke this particular criminal statute he should go be convicted. the

judge today ruled in part for the government she said that horror and also motive were not actually relevant to the charges but she did allow motive to be used circumstantially and what that means is with the knowledge element of aiding the enemy so if the defense wants to. come into court and say we have this evidence that he he he didn't have a reasonable belief that he was actually dealing with an enemy when he allegedly gave it to wiki leaks you can use that or if the government brings evidence from you know a witness about his state of mind the defense can use state of mind and motive as a rebuttal but everything else it's not but there's but there's no proof that he did the enemy i don't even understand how that's still a topic of discussion at the pretrial hearing when there are i mean have they

presented any evidence whatsoever what we are we know what they're going to present i mean probably they they did out of of the thousands of documents in this part in this particular trial they did it declassified one set of documents that they found at the raid of the bin ladin and that sort of tells you where the government is going with this case i mean it's i know very little full circle aren't there they really are and what what is this document really is about thirty seconds it's a series of letters and one of them had all of the allegedly all of the afghanistan war logs attached to it and so that's one of the pieces of evidence that they're going to use in article one for aiding the enemy unbelievable i don't even know if i believe you know i don't even know what to believe at this point i mean i don't know i mean that's crazy alexa well thank you so much for coming on and definitely can you give your website really good for people who want to follow the trial sure if you go to alexa o'brian dot com ok great thank you so much alexa thanks for shit

. jenner encounter people on certain forums message boards or conversation threads online that are unabashedly pro-u.s. now i'm sure you're thinking yes of course why would that be strange there are people out there supportive of the u.s. government and gauging in gomer stations social media won't but i don't mean those people i mean the online personas that oddly enough are unrelenting in their patriotic vitriol and troll for literally hours trying to debunk legitimate questions or any opposition to the establishment sometimes it seems like these people might even be getting paid to do it i mean how else could they expel that insane amount of time and energy on these common threads trying to argue how wrong you are while this might be old news to some but last year was confirmed that the

us military has been manipulating social media by using fake identities to influence conversations and spread pro-american propaganda it's called online persona management services and under the cent com contract allows the creation of up to ten sockpuppet accounts for every u.s. serviceman or woman working on the program stipulations are that every fake persona must have a convincing background history and supporting friend networks so to remain undetected from even the most sophisticated adversaries. according to guardian the project has been likened by web experts to china's attempts to control and restrict free speech on the internet and that critics are saying that it allows the u.s. military to create a false consensus in online conversations crowd out unwelcome opinions and some other commentaries are reports that do not correspond with its own objectives now of course according to centcom their only objective is to counter violent extremist

and enemy propaganda outside of the us and they would be unlawful to address u.s. audiences with the technology oh all unlawful really interesting because the newest version of the two thousand and thirteen n.b.a. included an interesting amendment this amendment legalize domestic propaganda and the american public you heard me right the newest n.b.a. wasn't just reauthorizing the indefinite detention of american citizens but also allowed the u.s. government to legally carry out misinformation campaigns against the citizens of this country but is this really surprising to anyone i mean the corporate media is basically a propaganda arm of the u.s. government anyways isn't it why they need to legalize the use of propaganda when you already have an entire mainstream media establishment lacking to the white house reprinting government press releases about question selling wars and carrying water for the administration in fact aside from everything i just mentioned the

pentagon already spends four billion dollars a year to influence public opinion and the department of defense also spends hundreds of millions of dollars on information campaigns and countless countries occupied by the us military but perhaps even more disturbing than all of this is the fact that the cia has already been infiltrating the biggest press institutions since the early one nine hundred fifty s. . one has to look no further than operation mockingbird secret cia campaign to spread disinformation and false stories to foreign governments during the cold war . they did this by manipulating the media into focusing on propaganda sabotage and subversion it was related later revealed in congressional hearings that the cia program consisted of literally paid off editors and reporters at most mainstream news outlets the new york times c.b.s. time the washington post newsweek a.p. reuters and countless more and one instance a journalist named joseph alsop was alleged to have been one of those prominent

journalist working under operation mockingbird wrote foreign affairs articles that appeared in over three hundred publications. so this is nice to know that the supposed watchdogs of the government can be so easily bought. even though the intent of this program was to focus on matters outside of this country and doubted the influenced everyone living here at the time people to this day could still be reading and referencing these articles not knowing that they're completely fake i'm sure this is more than fifty years ago but let's face the facts here our media is much worse now and has been much more easily compromised now so how do we know that operation mockingbird still isn't in effect well we don't so the next time you sit down and read the sunday paper visit an online forum just remember don't believe everything you read.

the please for us to. the left. so. precious children. play on the front your shoulders. leave it. on the.

do we speak your language or not a day of. school music programs and documentaries in spanish what matters to you breaking news a little turn it into angles kid in the stories. you hear. and then try i'll teach spanish to find out more visit i. tivo it's called. the phone.